doing' approach where actions are taken first, Each PALAR component was adapted to fit the engineering Exploring the innovative application of the Participatory Action This project spans multiple institutions and disciplines, engaging followed by reflection. This cycle enhances problem-solving skills and context, focusing on structured yet adaptable processes suitable Learning and Action Research (PALAR) framework in undergraduate, graduate, and faculty participants in a collaborative research practical application in real-world settings. for complex educational environments. engineering education, this research addresses complex effort. Communication
Paper ID #43214An Emerging Methodological Toolkit to Support Design of Problem-BasedLearning Environments: Connecting Problem Characteristics and KnowledgeTypesDave Mawer, University at Buffalo, The State University of New YorkDr. Andrew Olewnik, University at Buffalo, The State University of New York Andrew Olewnik is an Assistant Professor in the Department of Engineering Education at the University at Buffalo. His research includes undergraduate engineering education with focus on engineering design, problem-based learning, co-curricular involvement and its impact on professional formation, and the role of reflection
activities weredesigned to stimulate critical thinking about social aspects of engineering and to reframe thetraditionally technical obligations of the engineer within sociopolitical and equity-orientedstructures.Through a qualitative analysis of student experiences, assignments, and reflections as part of thecourse, this paper evaluates the impact of three pedagogical methods on student engagement withethical questions surrounding their decision-making as both individuals and as future engineers.The three methods being studied are Virtue Points, a tool that encourages self-reflection bycontrasting personal and professional virtues, an adapted ‘Spectrum Game’ based on conceptspresented by Jubilee Media, and a modified Pisces Game used to explore
present helpful resources to instructors to alleviate part of this labor, as a set of resourcesthat are readily available to be used in their courses (e.g., [2]–[4]), while also equipping studentswith knowledge of how to individually and collectively foster inclusive classroom practices andstronger agency in advocating for changes they wish to see in their courses by pointinginstructors to existing resources within such toolkits.In this work-in-progress paper, we present an Inclusive Teaching Toolkit, a set of resources,tools, and guides for instructors and students to foster inclusive and accessible practices in theirclassrooms, created through a reflection-based co-design with instructors and students. While avariety of similar toolkits have
through project or problem-basedlearning (PBL). Most of this section of the rubric draws from the “Ensuring Equity in PBLReflection Tool”[14]. This part of the rubric examines the degree to which students are allowedto exert agency and participate in team-learning environments that reflect real-world contextsand social impacts. The rubric encourages activities that engage every student, ensuring that alleducational experiences are hands-on and relevant to students' lived experiences andsocioeconomic backgrounds.Each of these sections contains specific items, totaling 27, which describe behaviors andpractices ranging from those that perpetuate inequity to those that foster an inclusive atmosphere.For example, under the "Head" section, item 1
studyabroad programs on the transformative learning outcomes of the participants are related to theirpersonality attributes.Transformative Learning in Study AbroadStudy abroad programs are exemplars of high-impact experiential learning. In Kolb’sexperiential learning theory, they focused on the centrality of experience and reflecting on theexperience. Like Kolb, Mezirow [4] also emphasized learning through critical reflection andproposed the transformative learning theory rooted in constructivism. According to Mezirow,when a disorienting event challenges an individual’s deep-rooted beliefs and assumptions, theywould critically reflect on those assumptions, initiating the transformative learning process [4].Consequently, the individual gains
mindset. To achieve thisobjective during the first offering, this course utilized active learning techniques, personalreflection, and the development of an individualized career-impact roadmap by each student. Inorder to work in conjunction with programming available from existing career centers andacademic advising, this interdisciplinary course placed an emphasis on personal reflection andthe roles of innovation and technology commercialization in creating societal impact. This paperdescribes the logistics of developing and implementing this 1-credit hour course and providesdetails of the assignments used to assess student learning. This course can serve as an example toother institutions who seek to more fully empower their students to
draw upon disciplinary-specific or epistemic ways of knowing,designing, decision-making, collaboration, and communication within their social andcultural context [5]. These are reflected in their use of specific tools and approaches whileproblem-solving, modelling, prototyping, evaluating, and sharing design solutions [5], [12],[13]. Many engineers use notebooks or design journals to document their knowledgeconstruction and reflections as they engage in the engineering design process andcommunicate with various audiences [9], [13], [14]. Engineers learn how to use thesenotebooks through a process of apprenticeship within their professional community ofpractice and practical experience [5], [9], [12], [13], [15]. As such, the notebook can
such as climatechange, healthcare, and food insecurity [2]. To solve these complex problems, engineers must understandthe societal impacts of their engineering designs on multiple stakeholders. The importance of socialimpact in engineering is reflected in the required student outcomes set by the Accreditation Board forEngineering and Technology (ABET). Student outcome two in the second criterion states that graduatesshould have “an ability to apply engineering design to produce solutions that meet specified needs withconsideration of public health, safety, and welfare, as well as global, cultural, social, environmental, andeconomic factors” [3]. Engineering students can learn to incorporate these factors in their designs andconsider
encouraging students to develop their own agency through avariety of course assignments afforded students the opportunity to develop adaptive perspectivesand a sense of control as they navigated troublesome shifts in professional identity. We alsofound evidence that students felt the program provides a sense of community, autonomy overprofessional development, and opportunity for exploration and self-discovery. Finally, instudents’ final written reflections on the course, we found evidence of increased sense of controlover their unique career development path and growth of their mentor network.We discuss the relevance of these findings for theory on interdisciplinary identity developmentand design of professional development courses to increase
individualreflections to understand the process of ISE formation. Pre-post comparisons of the quantitativesurvey items will be conducted for individual students in the test and control courses. Team andindividual reflections from the test course will be analyzed after the course. Potentialdemographic differences in ISE will be explored. Potential team-level influences will also beevaluated to understand the impact of a team’s ISE score on enhancing an individual teammember’s ISE gain. Focus groups and individual interviews with students who participated in thetest course will take place in spring 2024. The ISE, INT, and IW of environmental engineeringstudents will be further assessed in spring 2024 through the ISE survey in the environmentalengineering
use in K-12classrooms. A new course model was created that utilized a hybrid community of practice wherestudents learned about engineering education and worked together to support local K-12 schoolsby engaging in service learning. This project explored the ways in which participation in thiscourse impacted pre-service teachers’ perceptions of engineering and engineering teaching self-efficacy. We first administered a survey designed to measure engineering teaching self-efficacyto pre-service teachers at the beginning and end of the course. In addition, pre-service teachersalso completed reflective journals throughout the course in which they were asked to reflect onhow specific aspects of the course impacted their understanding of the nature
todevelop and employ innovative pedagogies to address the impediments to learning in an onlineenvironment. This proceeding describes the motivational impact on students from participatingin a semester-long asynchronous project to create a nature-inspired and entrepreneurially mindedpodcast in an online Engineering Technology course. The project's duration was intentionally anentire semester to encourage students to remain engaged in the overall course content. Thematicanalysis of student reflections indicates that participants were motivated in areas correspondingto Alderfer’s proposed categories of basic human needs: existence, relatedness, and growth. Theresults are presented and discussed concerning the motivational framework. Additionally
: Exploring Engineering Students’ Changing Perception of Racism in Automation during a First-Year Computation CourseAbstractThis Complete Evidence-based Practice paper describes first-year engineering students’perceptions, and specifically their shifts in those perspectives, towards the role of automation anddata science in society as well as the racial implications of how those human-made systems areimplemented and deployed. As part of a larger curricular change being made to a first-yearengineering course in computation, this paper specifically examines two reflection assignmentswhere students wrote, at different points in the semester (week 2 and week 12), regarding theirpersonal questions and understandings related
based in qualitative and quantitative ways. The qualitative approach considers theholistic, proposition rating and coding concepts. The quantitative approach considers thecounting components and similarity. The intersectionality of both considers categorical andrubric [9, 10]. A study using concept maps in a Statics class developed a module which coveredboth technical and entrepreneurial mindset topics. The activities used formative assessment tools.Results showed that concept maps were beneficial to students early in their engineeringcoursework to reflect on both technical knowledge and entrepreneurial mindset [11].The main issue with a multidisciplinary approach is how to assess it. It could be by the numbercollaborations or even publications
presentations.Peer evaluation is a collaborative learning strategy that asks students to reflect on contributionsmade by colleagues on group work. Peer evaluation encourages students to critically examine thework of peers and reflect on the quality of the work. It often involves the use of a detailed rubricor checklist as a guide [17]. Peer evaluation is an important strategy to keep student teammembers honest about their contributions to team deliverables. Students on project teams in ourcourses evaluate the contributions made by each team member when submitting a milestonedocument or a software prototype.Authentic AssessmentIt is difficult to use traditional paper or digital tests in hybrid classes containing both in-personand online students. Authentic
of HCD in existing engineering courses.Several research studies included the integration of HCD in existing engineering courses such asmechanical engineering [12] and electrical engineering [13]. The integration was guided by anevidence-based human-centered engineering design (HCED) framework that merges the HCDprocesses with the engineering design processes and lists a set of practices that students canimplement within the context of a design project [11]. These processes are understanding thechallenge, building knowledge, weighing options and making decisions, generating ideas,prototyping, reflecting, and revising/iterating. Research studies indicate that learning about theseprocesses and implementing them in the context of a design
' written reflections on ethical dilemmaswill be grouped according to three types of possible outcomes: client-based, company-based, andinnovation-based according to their answers to corporate social dilemmas. Students will have asurvey to determine what type of moral reasoning they adopt when they face an ethical dilemma.Students will be presented with an ethical decision-making scenario and answer it based on theirown individuality. The pre and post activity reflections will be compared to verify any changesin perspective in addressing the dilemma. The EM component to this decision-making activity isnot only mimicking decision-making situations as entrepreneurs, but it also includes thediscussion of the entrepreneurial mindset framework to either
the diverse individuals.Throughout the summer, students complete weekly guided reflections, and before and after theprogram, complete a pre- and post-assessment.MethodologyThis research study used mixed methods to collect data throughout the NHERI REU SummerProgram for a five (5) year period, which included five different cohorts of student researchers.The data collection is designed to follow a case study that is bound by time as studentsparticipate in the program together, attend the same events virtually, and provide the sameweekly deliverables. Although students have different experiences and perceptions based onindividual interactions at each of their sites, they are immersed as part of the community ofundergraduate researchers for the
end of this course, students will be able to 1. Reflect on interests and potential career paths 2. Leverage existing digital technologies ethically and efficiently to solve the problem of how to create professional relationships from scratch 3. Perform outreach and schedule career conversations, via video chat, with professionals via warm networking and cold networking strategies 4. Effectively conduct career conversations (making small talk, active listening, asking smart questions, expressing gratitude, etc.) 5. Develop a professional brand, including an effective LinkedIn profile 6. Utilize newfound relationships to access
studentteam leader and held to co-develop the process, deliverables, timeline and implementation plans.Students complete bi-weekly personal journal reflections to unpack their experience throughoutthe term. Projects are presented at the end of the term with agency representatives attending. Peerevaluations are conducted, as well as periodic surveys and focus groups to understand theefficacy of the experiences for both students and community partners. Students report highsatisfaction with the experience, pointing to several gains: deeper understanding of the plight ofcommunities in need (e.g., homeless, seniors, underprivileged kids), skills they honed during theproject (e.g., essential skills such as organizational, communication, presentation
response to these trends, more engineering courses are being designed to incorporate moreinnovative, creative problem-solving skills2,3,4,5. Some examples include field trips or minicompetitions as a creative model to encourage creativity6. In addition, problem-based learningand critical thinking skills in the context of real-world problems have been integrated intoengineering education to facilitate students’ divergent thinking during the idea generation phase7.Among them, the most common instructional approach in engineering education is open-endeddesign projects, where the target product is not defined in order to allow creative opportunities3,5.One argument in favor of open-ended design projects is that students reflect on their owncreative
examines the student perception and experience of solving open-endedmodeling problems (OEMPs) through an autoethnographic account of the student-authors’personal reflections about an OEMP completed during an introductory level statics course.Currently, the student perspective is not represented in literature about engineering problemsolving. This is significant as the student perspective is integral to understanding how studentslearn and develop an engineering mindset. By incorporating the student voice throughautoethnographic techniques, this study can begin to fill this gap and provide meaningful insightsabout the student experience and perceived benefits surrounding an OEMP.Autoethnography is an approach to research and writing that
developing feedback literacy. The framework also draws from Nicol and Macfarlane-Dick's [20] principles of good feedback practice, emphasizing the role of peer and self-assessment in feedback processes. In the context of Scrum, this dimension reflects the framework's collaborative nature, where feedback sources are not limited to the traditional instructor-student dynamic but include peers and self-reflection [22]. 2. Feedback Timing: Timeliness in feedback is highlighted by Hattie and Timperley's [19] model of effective feedback, which emphasizes the importance of immediate feedback in learning processes. This aspect is mirrored in the Scrum methodology, where regular sprint reviews and retrospectives [23] provide
communication.However, a noticeable gap emerged during PDR, CDR, and FDR presentation, where studentsoften fell short in providing adequate information to elucidate their design or present acomprehensive picture of the project's progress and completed work. When prompted for self-reflection, students expressed confusion, having adhered to the rubric, yet finding their workquality not meeting the expectations of sponsors and instructors. The critical missing elementwas identified as the quality of the presented work and the overall narrative. Students, engrossedin checking rubric boxes and conforming to rigid categories, inadvertently neglected the crucialinformation transformation process and the art of effective storytelling.The investigation unfolded in a
score (n = 178, p = 0.65), butshowed a decrease of -3.38 in P score (n = 178, p = 0.017). This suggests that over four years,there is a reduction in students prioritizing decisions that were altruistic and based on universalgood. It is challenging to predict why this occurs, but we tentatively suggest that it may reflect amore accurate representation of students' thoughts on these ethical dilemmas. Additionally, itmight indicate a deeper consideration of the complex factors typically involved in real ethicaldecisions, rather than merely an abstract evaluation of what a reasonable engineer should do.Given these results and to gain a fuller understanding of students’ changes in ethical reasoningthroughout their undergraduate programs, we contend
take action(and which action) toward educational goals that matter to them. In particular, the agencyframework posits that professional capital (such as that can be developed in a group coachingsetting) can broaden an individual's awareness of possible actions to reach their goals [13].Consequently, a group coaching model was implemented to equip EIFs with the necessary toolsto lead educational change at their HSI. Coaching, often misinterpreted as other forms ofprofessional development such as mentoring or consultation, is a unique practice that avoidsadvice-giving strategies and encourages a client to seek solutions within themselves [14], [15].This coaching model was designed to encourage reflective practice, broaden their community(thereby
human-centered design approach, (2) the intersection of socialjustice and design thinking, and (3) the implications of design choices on historicallymarginalized groups. Course artifacts, student reflections, and instructional team reflections areused to understand the growth in mindset of the students and instructor through this course.Additionally, these resources are used to present key learnings for future implementation.This project focused on examining systems. Groups historically excluded from engineering,including people of color, disabled, LGBTQ+, and women, were recentered through the humancentered design process. Students evaluated engineering systems for exclusion and ideated on thesource of these design flaws. In doing so, they
narratives, storytellingevokes strong emotions and imparts significant insights while translating private experiencesinto publicly negotiated forms [11]. As such, storytelling has been recognized as a tool forenabling learning as well as a tool for sharing experiences within a community of practice [1]. Inour work we extend this by partnering with undergraduates to share their stories more broadly.Storytelling enables the storyteller to adjust the narrative according to the situation, putting themin charge of what they want to say and how they want to say it.Beyond the professional community and body of knowledge in engineering education, students'experiences, and their reflections on their experiences can potentially transform
reflect further on themethodology and its potential for use in other engineering education research. Throughout thecase study section of the paper, we will use the terms we and the researchers to refer to the twoauthors of this paper and the participants to refer to the two people enrolled in our study. Outsideof our positionality statements, I will refer to the first author of this paper, Alexis Gillmore.Case study: Representing Researcher Identity with I-poemsResearch ContextIn the work presented here, we aimed to learn how members of an interdisciplinary researchteam represent their identities as researchers within the team. We expected that the participant-generated I-poem method we employed would lead to unique results compared to